Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian
I will promote the artifacts to the central repo.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-ma
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian
I will promote the artifacts to the central repo.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-ma
Hi,
The vote has passed with the following result :
+1 (binding): Olivier, Mark, Kristian
I will promote the artifacts to the central repo.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-ma
+1
(note sure the diff link you provide is correct but I have review
difference and sounds good).
2011/6/17 Benson Margulies :
> Hey, a couple of more +1's would be handy here.
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We solved 1 issues:
>>
>> ** Improvement
>
+1
On 6/14/11 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Hi,
We solved 1 issues:
** Improvement
* [MPOM-12] - Update maven-plugins to new org.apache.maven:maven-parent:20
There are no open JIRAs against the maven-plugins parent.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/pom/trunk/maven/pom.xml?r1=113590
Hey, a couple of more +1's would be handy here.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We solved 1 issues:
>
> ** Improvement
> * [MPOM-12] - Update maven-plugins to new org.apache.maven:maven-parent:20
>
> There are no open JIRAs against the maven-plugins parent.
>
Jason,
Your synopsis is pretty much complete and total hogwash. Except for
the board action, the PMC has been very, very involved for quite a
long time. Since you are not on the PMC, maybe you didn't know that.
In which case, please don't attempt to "imagine" what is happening;
reality is sooo muc
On Jun 17, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Jason, all I can say in response is that I am impressed with
> both your reinterpretation of history as well as the size
> of your stugots in somehow placing the "blame" on the board
> and myself.
>
As I am impressed with yours. When things a
The Maven team is pleased to announce the release of the Maven EAR
Plugin, version 2.6
This version brings mainly detection of application client archive
managed by the recent maven-arc-plugin [1]
http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-ear-plugin/
You should specify the version in your project's
As an introduction to those here in Maven land, I'm the VP of Brand
Management at the Apache Software Foundation, and I and my officer's
committee at trademarks@ are responsible for setting brand policy for
all Apache projects, including trademark usage by third parties.
Since this includes co
Jason, all I can say in response is that I am impressed with
both your reinterpretation of history as well as the size
of your stugots in somehow placing the "blame" on the board
and myself.
We have made incredible progress, and your sweeping and baseless
arguments are impeding and damaging that.
A highly confusing situation in the current design results from the
interaction of , aggregation, and the site plugin.
Superficially, it seems very natural: the usual practice is for an
aggregating project to be the parent of its modules.
Even the terminology is painful: we don't really have a cl
+1
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Fri, 6/17/11, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> From: Kristian Rosenvold
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Enforcer version 1.0.1 - Take 2
> To: "Maven Developers List"
> Date: Friday, June 17, 2011, 6:38 AM
> I am aware of that problem, I did not
> know how to fix it. I
FWIW, I'm glad the PMC has had the chance to participate in saying what
it wants in the MOU with Sonatype. Unfortunately, such participation has
to happen as we have time, and since we're a project of volunteers it
may not happen on the timescales that companies are used to. So, if the
buck has
Jim,
Your misunderstanding of someone else's point of view and dismissing it out of
hand without any further discussion is what got us here in the first place. You
have no problems ignoring whatever you feel like which generally makes it hard
to arrive at a resolution. Your job as an ASF Board
The below shows that you are extremely out of touch regarding
what has been going on. As such, I have no problems with
ignoring it.
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call
> between a representative Apache bo
Email coming your way.
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:44 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Not sure what there is to "sort out"... But of course,
> you are also welcome to get on the phone and sort it
> out as well.
>
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> Jim, just get on the phone and sort
+1
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> From: Olivier Lamy
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Surefire Plugin version 2.9
> To: "Maven Developers List"
> Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:26 PM
> +1
>
> 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold :
> > Hi,
> >
> > We solved 17 issues:
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> Jason!
>
> I bet you are well aware that the PMC is actively working on an MOU since a
> few weeks. (I even was roughly walking thru the draft with a Sonatype
> employee yesterday).
>
I'm not well aware at all. How can anyone at Sonatype be
Not sure what there is to "sort out"... But of course,
you are also welcome to get on the phone and sort it
out as well.
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard.
>
> On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>>
The bottom line is that this is likely easy to resolve very quickly. A call
between a representative Apache board member, a Sonatype representative, and a
secretary to agree on the actions, and carry them out. That seems like a pretty
easy plan of action. Anything else just says to me that the b
Jason!
I bet you are well aware that the PMC is actively working on an MOU since a few
weeks. (I even was roughly walking thru the draft with a Sonatype employee
yesterday).
So please relax a bit and stop throwing oil on the fire.
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Fri, 6/17/11, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
On 06/17/2011 03:03 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> What Sonatype was seeking was the use of "Maven Central" as a service
> mark in very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has
> been granted a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the service mark
> "Hadoop World".
That's a separate i
+1
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> From: Olivier Lamy
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Verifier version 1.3
> To: "Maven Developers List"
> Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:25 PM
> +1
>
> 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We solved/improved quit
Jim, just get on the phone and sort it out. It's not that hard.
On Jun 17, 2011, at 9:09 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention
> below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL
> trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant
On Jun 17, 2011, at 7:36 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Jason, the board has not leaked the information, so rest assured
> it was not from us.
I'm not sure what information you're referring to.
> Also rest assured that no one questions
> Sonatypes committment to the users nor your pursuit of innova
+1
LieGrue,
strub
--- On Thu, 6/16/11, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> From: Olivier Lamy
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Maven Remote Resources Plugin version 1.2.1
> To: "Maven Developers List"
> Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 8:24 PM
> +1
>
> 2011/6/14 Kristian Rosenvold :
> > Hi,
> >
> > We solved 1
Jason, please stop confusing the issue. In both cases you mention
below, the PMCs have been very VERY involved in tracking ALL
trademark issues, and have been even more vigilant with those
entities in which they are a part of as far as employment (I
would encourage you to look over, for example, Ma
Doug, this is only part of the story but if we are strictly talking about
trademarks here then people should understand what that discussion is about.
What Sonatype was seeking was the use of "Maven Central" as a service mark in
very much the same way Doug Cutting's company, Cloudera, has been g
Jason, the board has not leaked the information, so rest assured
it was not from us. Also rest assured that no one questions
Sonatypes committment to the users nor your pursuit of innovation.
We only question why Sonatype refuses to attribute Maven as
a mark of the ASF, even after I was assured by
For many months the board has been asking the Maven project to obtain
proper attribution from Sonatype for Apache's "Maven" trademark.
Sonatype has thus far failed to comply. The Sonatype website states
only that "Apache Maven" is a trademark of the ASF, not that "Maven"
alone is also a trademark
OK... I have another question.
when i run " mvn archetype:generate" it asks for parameters like groupId ,
artifactId , package and version.
Now i want to ask for an extra parameter like module-author but i want to
ask in this manner
*Do you want to enter module-author? ( Y / N)*
(on entering Y ,
I wondered about the import restriction for a long time already. Imo this
_exactly_ feels natural. Much more than having multiple parents.
Also the pom for the main artifacts might stay pretty much 4.0, but our
MavenProject Parser would need more fidling. Of course we could define a new
packag
33 matches
Mail list logo
